DOCSLIB.ORG

Social Structure in Economic Theory

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text

Load more

This is a repository copy of Social structure in economic theory. White Rose Research Online URL for this paper: https://eprints.whiterose.ac.uk/119800/ Version: Accepted Version Article: Jackson, W A orcid.org/0000-0001-5194-7307 (2003) Social structure in economic theory. Journal of Economic Issues. pp. 727-746. ISSN 0021-3624 Reuse Items deposited in White Rose Research Online are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved unless indicated otherwise. They may be downloaded and/or printed for private study, or other acts as permitted by national copyright laws. The publisher or other rights holders may allow further reproduction and re-use of the full text version. This is indicated by the licence information on the White Rose Research Online record for the item. Takedown If you consider content in White Rose Research Online to be in breach of UK law, please notify us by emailing [email protected] including the URL of the record and the reason for the withdrawal request. [email protected] https://eprints.whiterose.ac.uk/ SOCIAL STRUCTURE IN ECONOMIC THEORY William A. Jackson Department of Economics and Related Studies. University of York, York YO10 5DD, UK Email: [email protected] Abstract Much economic theory, especially the orthodox variety, keeps away from structural methods and makes little or no reference to social structure: the word ‘structure’ is used only rarely and casually, so that its sense remains unclear. This paper argues that economics might gain from a richer, more fluid treatment of social structure, as proposed in recent social theory. After considering the structural content of heterodox economics, the paper examines how current approaches might be developed to yield new structural concepts capable of accommodating economic diversity and change. An enhanced definition of social structure could provide a structural foundation for economics without denying human agency or historical evolution. Keywords: social structure, economic theory, dualism, duality, structural change Social structure is a core concept in most social sciences, but it has never quite had this status in economics. Much economic theory, especially the orthodox variety, keeps away from structural methods and makes little or no reference to social structure: the word structure is used only rarely and casually, so that its sense remains unclear. This puts economics out of step with other academic disciplines, which are more amenable to structural ideas, and broaches the issue of whether social structure has been unduly neglected in economic theory. Orthodox economists, committed to methodological individualism, have been wary of social structure, lest it would undermine their individualistic stance and promote a “non- economic,” sociological outlook. Neoclassical economics begins with rational agents who have fixed preferences defined from the outset. Social structures either are absent or have a subordinate place as market imperfections that must be explained through individual behavior. Any structure bringing people together to form a larger whole will contradict the atomism of neoclassical thought. Heterodox economists, by contrast, have no such commitment to individualistic methods and should be comfortable with social structure. It does indeed feature in heterodox economics, but it often stays implicit and has less prominence than one might expect. Modern concepts of structure are based on relationships among parts of a whole: for structural analysis to be relevant, the parts must be internally related such that they are necessary to the whole and each part could not exist without the others (Sayer 1992, chapter 3). If the parts have no interdependence and only external relationships, then the whole is at most an aggregate (perhaps not even that), and structural analysis ceases to be relevant. The hallmark of a structural method is its reliance on internal relations among parts making up a whole. Structural theory can sometimes turn into holism and give the whole precedence over the parts, yet the original aim of structural ideas—as against holistic ones—was to ensure that the whole could always be transformed, or else the whole-part relationship would be redundant. A structural method, if handled properly, should never congeal into structural wholes that overshadow their component parts. The word structure has acquired unhelpful connotations from the analogy with physical structures. Comparison with a building suggests something hard, permanent, and complete, as if it were built from solid materials and to a predetermined plan. Social structure would - 1 - then enter economics as a rigid constraint that restricted human behavior. The static analogy is misleading and offers at best a partial view of structure. In its earliest English language uses, structure was a noun of process which referred to the act of building, not the end product; only later has structure become static (Williams 1983). Even when seen as a state rather than a process, structure still has a capacity for change. This paper argues that economics might gain from a richer, more fluid treatment of social structure, as proposed in recent social theory. After considering the structural content of heterodox economics, the paper examines how current approaches might be developed to yield new structural concepts capable of accommodating economic diversity and change. An enhanced definition of social structure could provide a structural foundation for economics without denying human agency or historical evolution. Social Structure in Heterodox Economics Most heterodox economics—notably institutionalism, Post Keynesianism, and the Marxian/classical tradition—has shown awareness that economic behavior is embedded in social structure. This may be expressed indirectly, but it underlies the theoretical arguments being made and the rejection of methodological individualism; structural methods are at the heart of a heterodox approach. The agreement that economics should have a structural aspect has not, however, brought a uniform definition of social structure, and the concept remains somewhat vague. Ambiguities about social structure affect all social sciences, not just economics, and do not necessarily imply careless theorizing—the varied meanings are symptoms of the subject’s complexity as much as the theorists’ failures. The diversity of structural theories at least demonstrates that heterodox economists are escaping any stale theoretical orthodoxy and producing new accounts of their object of study. More lucid terminology would still be welcome, though, as long as it did not foster oversimplified methods. - 2 - Particular problems arise over the link between people and social structures. Is a social structure made up of people, or does it comprise roles and positions distinct from the people who occupy them? The first alternative is a more humanistic view focused on personal relations and collective agency; the second is a more structural view keeping structure and agency apart. The two views are different but compatible: if roles are to influence behavior, then people must fill them, and so social structure can never be cut off from the individual members of society. Among the many uses of the term social structure, the commonest stress roles and positions rather than people. In sociology, the conventional meaning of structure revolves around a society’s systemic properties, as determined by formal institutions and normalized behavior. Textbook definitions of social structure incline toward the role-based view that distinguishes structural positions from the people who occupy them. This stems largely from the structural-functionalism of Talcott Parsons and his followers, which depicted societies as complex multilayered systems with their own functional prerequisites. Parsons himself did not clearly distinguish structures from people, and his theory can be interpreted variously, but his fondness for systemic arguments (especially in his later work) led to a systemic notion of social structure (1951). A role-based, structural approach has come to characterize sociological analysis in the same way that individualism characterizes neoclassical economics. The systemic, Parsonian version of social structure is rare in economic theory, since economists have usually heeded the economics/sociology dichotomy and few have drawn their ideas from sociology. A role-based definition of social structure is, however, discernible in strands of heterodox economics that ground themselves in social theory. The critical realist research program, for example, situates economics within a more general, non-reductive theoretical framework for all social science (Lawson 1997; Jackson 1995). Following the usual sociological practice, critical realism has defined social structure as relations among roles and positions, although it is careful to leave space for human agency as well. The interdependence of distinct structure and agency concepts can guard against reductive social theory. - 3 - Other heterodox approaches, such as institutionalism, have made less use of role-based social structure. The work of Thorstein Veblen and John R. Commons deals extensively with structured and socialized behavior but allows for different types and levels of structured activity: there is no prior notion of structure. Veblen, for instance, located the regularities of economic behavior at the individual level through the concept of habit, in other words, the tendency to engage in previously
Recommended publications
  • Post-Keynesian Economics

    Post-Keynesian Economics

    History and Methods of Post- Keynesian Macroeconomics Marc Lavoie University of Ottawa Outline • 1A. We set post-Keynesian economics within a set of multiple heterodox schools of thought, in opposition to mainstream schools. • 1B. We identify the main features (presuppositions) of heterodoxy, contrasting them to those of orthodoxy. • 2. We go over a brief history of post-Keynesian economics, in particular its founding institutional moments. • 3. We identify the additional features that characterize post- Keynesian economics relative to closely-related heterodox schools. • 4. We delineate the various streams of post-Keynesian economics: Fundamentalism, Kaleckian, Kaldorian, Sraffian, Institutionalist. • 5. We discuss the evolution of post-Keynesian economics, and some of its important works over the last 40 years. • 6. We mention some of the debates that have rocked post- Keynesian economics. PART I Heterodox schools Heterodox vs Orthodox economics •NON-ORTHODOX • ORTHODOX PARADIGM PARADIGM • DOMINANT PARADIGM • HETERODOX PARADIGM • THE MAINSTREAM • POST-CLASSICAL PARADIGM • NEOCLASSICAL ECONOMICS • RADICAL POLITICAL ECONOMY • REVIVAL OF POLITICAL ECONOMY Macro- economics Heterodox Neoclassical authors KEYNES school Cambridge Old Marxists Monetarists Keynesians Keynesians Radicals French Post- New New Regulation Keynesians Keynesians Classicals School Orthodox vs Heterodox economics • Post-Keynesian economics is one of many different heterodox schools of economics. • Heterodox economists are dissenters in economics. • Dissent is a broader
  • Hodgson Pour

    Hodgson Pour

    Revue de la régulation Capitalisme, Institutions, Pouvoirs , n°2, 2008 Fostering Variety in Economics. Entretien avec Geoffrey Hodgson Agnès Labrousse, Julien Vercueil RR. : Although they are not new in economics, evolutionary and institutional approaches have attracted a growing interest since the 1980s. How do you explain that? Geoffrey Hodgson : When I started working on institutional and evolutionary ideas in the early 1980s, I felt almost a lone voice among economists. Now the situation is very different. There are several reasons for the rise in interest in institutional and evolutionary ideas. Until the 1970s, much of the challenge to mainstream ideas was in macroeconomics, reflecting the influence of Keynesian and Marxian approaches. With some exceptions, such as the work of Herbert Simon, orthodox micro-theory faced less opposition. To a significant degree, the rise of institutional, evolutionary and behavioural approaches reflects the growing development of alternative theories in the microeconomic arena. These became significant in the 1980s, notably with the work of Richard Nelson, Sidney Winter and Oliver Williamson. By the 1990s, some of these critical movements had had a major impact on mainstream approaches, and others became more prominent among heterodox economists. The new institutionalists Ronald Coase and Douglass North were awarded Nobel Prizes in 1991 and 1993. The various forms of institutional and evolutionary thought tackle important questions concerning institutions and economic development that were relatively neglected from the 1950s to the 1970s. RR. : Could you present the core propositions of your institutional and evolutionary economics? GH. : Both ‘institutional economics’ and ‘evolutionary economics’ are very broad churches. There are as many important differences within both the original and new institutional economics as there are between them.
  • SOCIOLOGY 9191A Social Science in the Marxian Tradition Fall 2020

    SOCIOLOGY 9191A Social Science in the Marxian Tradition Fall 2020

    SOCIOLOGY 9191A Social Science in the Marxian Tradition Fall 2020 DRAFT Class times and location Wednesday 10:30am -12:30pm Virtual synchronous Instructor: David Calnitsky Office Hours by appointment Department of Sociology Office: SSC 5402 Email: [email protected] Technical Requirements: Stable internet connection Laptop or computer Working microphone Working webcam “The philosophers have only interpreted the world, in various ways. The point, however, is to change it.” – Karl Marx That is the point, it’s true—but not in this course. This quote, indirectly, hints at a deep tension in Marxism. If we want to change the world we need to understand it. But the desire to change something can infect our understanding of it. This is a pervasive dynamic in the history of Marxism and the first step is to admit there is a problem. This means acknowledging the presence of wishful thinking, without letting it induce paralysis. On the other hand, if there are pitfalls in being upfront in your desire to change the world there are also virtues. The normative 1 goal of social change helps to avoid common trappings of academia, in particular, the laser focus on irrelevant questions. Plus, in having a set of value commitments, stated clearly, you avoid the false pretense that values don’t enter in the backdoor in social science, which they often do if you’re paying attention. With this caveat in place, Marxian social science really does have a lot to offer in understanding the world and that’s what we’ll analyze in this course. The goal is to look at the different hypotheses that broadly emerge out of the Marxian tradition and see the extent to which they can be supported both theoretically and empirically.
  • Reconstructing Structural Marxism

    Reconstructing Structural Marxism

    REVIEWS Reconstructing Structural Marxism Ted Benton, The Rise and Fall of Structural Marxism; The charge of Stalinism, together with the current Althusser and his Influence, Macmillan, London, 1984, state of disarray amongst Althusserians, provides 259pp lI8.00 hc, 1.6.95 pb Benton with one of the two major reasons for writing Rise and Fall; namely to defend Structural Marxism Benton's book has many facets: it is an introductory against post-structuralist and other critics (the other text, a re-evaluation and reconstruction of Structural reason being the need for an introductory text in the Marxism, an argument for theoretical progress lying area). One way in which .8enton accomplishes this def­ through the synthesis of Structural Marxism with do­ ence is by laying bare Structural Marxism'S sociological mains such as the ecological, biological and psycho­ complexi ty. This completely appears as the obverse side logical. Of immediate political relevance is its claim of the process of displacement,· as decentr ing, of human that theorisation of socialist strategy requires a recog­ agency by the Althusserian paradigm. The stratagem of nition by the Marxist tradition of non class-based decentring, an anti-reificatory device, denies that the emancipatory social movements. AU these strands are individual agent is onto logically prior to social. struc­ brought together in the major objective of the book - a tures, events and processes. This refutation of the critical defence of Structural Marxism. 'social substantiality' of the individual subject is the Rise and Fall is divided into three thematic parts. basis of Althusser's anti-humanism. The first centres on questions of epistemology as they surface in Structural Marxism: the science-ideology dis­ Sociological complexity tinction, the epistemological break, the concept of a problematic, Marxism and philosophy.
  • Models of the Developmental State

    Models of the Developmental State

    Models of the developmental state Luiz Carlos Bresser-Pereira Abstract This paper seeks to understand the developmental state and its historical role in industrial revolutions and afterwards. First, the developmental state is defined as an alternative to the liberal state. Second, it is argued that industrial revolutions have always taken place within the framework of a developmental state. Third, four models of developmental states are defined according to the point in time at which the industrial revolution took place and the central or peripheral character of the country. Fourth, the paper describes how the state withdraws partially from the economy after the industrial revolution, but the developmental state continues to have a major role in directing industrial policy and in conducting an active macroeconomic policy. Keywords Public administration, economic planning, macroeconomics, liberalism, nationalism, economic policy, economic development JEL classification O10, O11, O19 Author Luiz Carlos Bresser-Pereira is an Emeritus Professor with the Department of Economics of the Sao Paulo School of Economics, Getulio Vargas Foundation, Brazil. Email: [email protected]. 36 CEPAL Review N° 128 • August 2019 I. Introduction In the 1950s, Brazilian political scientists and economists identified “developmentalism” as a set of political ideas and economic strategies that drove Brazil’s rapid industrialization and underpinned the coalition of social classes identified with national development. Hélio Jaguaribe (1962, p. 208) stated in the early 1960s that “the core thesis of developmentalism is that the promotion of economic development and the consolidation of nationality stand as two correlated aspects of a single emancipatory process”. Through “national developmentalism”, which would become the established term for the country’s development strategy, Brazilian society was successfully overcoming the patrimonial state that characterized its politics until 1930.
  • Educational Philosophy: from Classical Marxism to Critical Pedagogy

    Educational Philosophy: from Classical Marxism to Critical Pedagogy

    Marxian Perspectives on Educational Philosophy: From Classical Marxism to Critical Pedagogy By Douglas Kellner (http://www.gseis.ucla.edu/faculty/kellner/) It is surely not difficult to see that our time is a time of birth and transition to a new period. The spirit has broken with what was hitherto the world of its existence and imagination and is about to submerge all this in the past; it is at work giving itself a new form. To be sure, the spirit is never at rest but always engaged in ever progressing motion.... the spirit that educates itself matures slowly and quietly toward the new form, dissolving one particle of the edifice of its previous world after the other,.... This gradual crumbling... is interrupted by the break of day that, like lightning, all at once reveals the edifice of the new world. Hegel 1965 [1807]: 380. The theory associated with Marxism was developed in mid-19th century Europe by Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels. Although Marx and Engels did not write widely about education, they developed theoretical perspectives on modern societies that have been used to highlight the social functions of education and their concepts and methods have served to both theorize and criticize education in the reproduction of capitalist societies, and to support projects of alternative education. In this study, I will first briefly sketch the classical perspectives of Marx and Engels, highlighting the place of education in their work. Then, I lay out the way that Marxian perspectives on education were developed in the Frankfurt School critical theory, British cultural studies, and other neo- Marxian and post-Marxian approaches grouped under the label of critical pedagogy, that emerged from the work of Paulo Freire and is now global in scope.
  • REVISITED Capitalism, Higher Education and Ecological Crisis

    REVISITED Capitalism, Higher Education and Ecological Crisis

    REPRODUCTION REVISITED Capitalism, Higher Education and Ecological Crisis TONI RUUSKA REPRODUCTION REVISITED Published by MayflyBooks. Available in paperback and free online at www.mayflybooks.org in 2019. © Toni Ruuska 2019 Cover photo and design by Risto Musta ISBN: 978-1-906948-42-9 (Print) 978-1-906948-43-6 (PDF) 978-1-906948-44-3 (ebook) This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-Non commercial-No Derivatives 4.0 International (CC BY-NC-ND 4.0). To view a copy of this license, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/. REPRODUCTION REVISITED Capitalism, Higher Education and Ecological Crisis TONI RUUSKA may f l y www.mayflybooks.org iv CONTENTS 1. INTRODUCTION……………………………………………1 2. MARX AND MARXISM…………………………………14 Philosophy, ecology, education 3. CAPITALISM AND FINITE PLANET………………… 56 The Absolute Contradiction 4. REPRODUCTION OF CAPITALISM…………………115 5. CAPITALISM, HIGHER EDUCATION………………156 AND ECOLOGICAL CRISIS 6. HIGHER EDUCATION AS A FACTORY……………180 OF COMPETITIVENESS AND INNOVATIONS The Finnish Context 7. REPRODUCTION REVISITED…………………………240 Conclusions 8. REFERENCES……………………………………………256 v vi 1 INTRODUCTION t is warmer now. The climate is changing. Somewhere rains Iare heavier, somewhere they are non-existent. Storms are more intense. The weather is unstable. Recurring heat waves and floods torment the livelihoods of humans and other earthly beings. Ice melts, and ocean levels are on the rise, as are ocean temperatures. Worse still, climate change is only one part of the ongoing ecological crisis (see e.g. Steffen et al., 2015), although perhaps the most critical part of it together with biodiversity loss. This crisis, for one, is human-induced.
  • Towards a Unified Theory Analysing Workplace Ideologies: Marxism And

    Towards a Unified Theory Analysing Workplace Ideologies: Marxism And

    Marxism and Racial Oppression: Towards a Unified Theory Charles Post (City University of New York) Half a century ago, the revival of the womens movementsecond wave feminismforced the revolutionary left and Marxist theory to revisit the Womens Question. As historical materialists in the 1960s and 1970s grappled with the relationship between capitalism, class and gender, two fundamental positions emerged. The dominant response was dual systems theory. Beginning with the historically correct observation that male domination predates the emergence of the capitalist mode of production, these theorists argued that contemporary gender oppression could only be comprehended as the result of the interaction of two separate systemsa patriarchal system of gender domination and the capitalist mode of production. The alternative approach emerged from the debates on domestic labor and the predominantly privatized character of the social reproduction of labor-power under capitalism. In 1979, Lise Vogel synthesized an alternative unitary approach that rooted gender oppression in the tensions between the increasingly socialized character of (most) commodity production and the essentially privatized character of the social reproduction of labor-power. Today, dual-systems theory has morphed into intersectionality where distinct systems of class, gender, sexuality and race interact to shape oppression, exploitation and identity. This paper attempts to begin the construction of an outline of a unified theory of race and capitalism. The paper begins by critically examining two Marxian approaches. On one side are those like Ellen Meiksins Wood who argued that capitalism is essentially color-blind and can reproduce itself without racial or gender oppression. On the other are those like David Roediger and Elizabeth Esch who argue that only an intersectional analysis can allow historical materialists to grasp the relationship of capitalism and racial oppression.
  • Abstract Geographies of Neoliberal Regulation And

    Abstract Geographies of Neoliberal Regulation And

    ABSTRACT GEOGRAPHIES OF NEOLIBERAL REGULATION AND THE EVERYDAY URBAN EXPERIENCE: A CASE STUDY OF OVER-THE-RHINE, CINCINNATI Jean-Paul David Addie This thesis analyses the impacts of neoliberal urbanism through conducting a qualitative case study of the inner-city neighbourhood of Over-the-Rhine, Cincinnati. Drawing upon the geographic concept of 'actually existing' neoliberalism, combined with in-depth interviews with neighbourhood organisations, community advocacy groups and residents in Over-the-Rhine, I explore the complex, often contradictory and dialectical relationships between neoliberal regulatory-institutional restructuring, the production of urban space, and the practices of everyday life. Played out against a background of racial tension and civil unrest, the creation of a new, neoliberal institutional landscape in Over-the-Rhine politically and economically disenfranchises the most marginalised neighbourhood inhabitants through re-articulating urban and political space, and re-imagining the ideological form and function of the inner city and the urban poor. I assert the significance of place-based studies to explore the place-specific articulations of neoliberal urbanism and in doing so, present directions for future research. GEOGRAPHIES OF NEOLIBERAL REGULATION AND THE EVERYDAY URBAN EXPERIENCE: A CASE STUDY OF OVER-THE-RHINE, CINCINNATI A Thesis Submitted to the Faculty of Miami University in partial fulfilment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Arts Department of Geography by Jean-Paul David Addie Miami University
  • The Dewey-Trotsky Encounter in Politics and Praxis by Kevin S

    The Dewey-Trotsky Encounter in Politics and Praxis by Kevin S

    In London Street: The Dewey-Trotsky Encounter in Politics and Praxis by Kevin S. Decker In London Street: The Dewey-Trotsky Encounter in Politics and Praxis by Kevin S. Decker English Abstract No one who has looked closely can fail to see a remarkable congruency between the synthesis of ideas that represents the culmination of classical pragmatism, on the one hand, and Marx’s early humanist program on the other. Despite this ground for potential commensurability, Trotsky and Dewey, while historical near-contemporaries, were fundamentally polar opposites; their contributions to “Their Morals and Ours,” Dewey and Trotsky found themselves on opposing theoretical positions with regard to the idea that, as one student of socialism claims, “as certainty about the future dissipates, ethics becomes necessary.” Despite the fact that one philosophized about civil society while the other acted in lieu of an established civil society, Dewey and Trotsky both recognized valid reasons for the crisis of public authority in Western liberalism. I argue that what unites the politics of Dewey with the early Marx, a view of praxis that demonstrates human intelligence as crystallized in social and technical practices, is precisely what Trotsky (and other Bolshevik leaders) abandoned in an effort to impose an over-intellectualized ideological framework on Russian society and culture. From this perspective, the Bolshevik experiment was bound to fail. The reasons for this entail lessons for how to address the “democratic deficit” in Western politics in general today. Resumen en español Nadie que haya mirado de cerca se puede dejar de ver una congruencia notable entre la síntesis de las ideas que representa la culminación del pragmatismo clásico, por un lado, y pronto programa humanista de Marx sobre el otro.
  • Post-Keynesian Economics

    Post-Keynesian Economics

    History and Fundamentals of Post-Keynesian Macroeconomics Marc Lavoie University of Paris 13 University of Ottawa A Modern Guide To Keynesian Macroeconomics And Economic Policies Outline • 1. We set post-Keynesian economics within a set of multiple heterodox schools of thought, in opposition to mainstream schools and quickly identify the main features (presuppositions) of heterodoxy, contrasting them to those of orthodoxy. • 2. We cover a brief history of post-Keynesian economics, in particular its founding moments. • 3. We identify the additional features that characterize post- Keynesian economics relative to closely-related heterodox schools. • 4. We delineate the various streams of post-Keynesian economics: Fundamentalist, Kaleckian, Kaldorian, Sraffian, Institutionalist. • 5. PKE in the limelight: monetary economics 7th FMM International Summer School, Keynesian Macroeconomics and Economic Policies, July-August 2019 PART I Heterodox schools and Keynesian schools Heterodox vs Orthodox economics • HETERODOX PARADIGM • ORTHODOX PARADIGM • NON-ORTHODOX • DOMINANT PARADIGM PARADIGM • THE MAINSTREAM • POST-CLASSICAL PARADIGM • NEOCLASSICAL ECONOMICS • REVIVAL OF POLITICAL ECONOMY • MARGINALISM • REAL-WORLD ECONOMICS 7th FMM International Summer School, Keynesian Macroeconomics and Economic Policies, July-August 2019 • Lee, Lavoie ROPE 2012 • J.E. King • Stockhammer and Ramskögler • Dobusch and Kapeller • D. Dequech • B. Hopkins • M. Vernengo • Earl and Peng • G. Mongiovi • Rochon and Docherty • D. Foley • L. Hoang-Ngoc 7th FMM International Summer School, Keynesian Macroeconomics and Economic Policies, July-August 2019 Hodgson (August 2019 book): Is There a Future for Heterodox Economics? • “Over the last 50 years, and particularly since the financial crash in 2008, the community of heterodox economists has expanded, and its publications have proliferated. But its power in departments of economics has waned.
  • In the Matter of Marxism

    In the Matter of Marxism

    03-Tilley-3290-Ch01.qxd 11/17/2005 6:57 PM Page 13 1 IN THE MATTER OF MARXISM Bill Maurer The real unity of the world consists in its have insisted on an account of actually existing materiality, and this is proved not only by a few ‘men’ in their real, material conditions of exis- juggled phrases, but by a long and wearisome tence. Reactions against abstraction in theory development of philosophy and natural science. more recently often explicitly or implicitly (Engels, Anti-Dühring, 1877) invoke the Marxist heritage as both a theoreti- cal formation and an agenda for oppositional You make me feel mighty real. political practice. As Marx wrote in his eleventh thesis on Feuerbach, ‘The philosophers have (Sylvester, 1978) only interpreted the world, in various ways; the point is to change it.’ Or, as a colleague once put it to me, ‘Derrida never helped save a WHAT’S THE MATTER WITH Guatemalan peasant.’ MARXISM? This chapter uses a narrow delineation of the field of Marxist-inspired debate and critique, emphasizing those anthropologists (and, to a It is difficult to think about materiality, or to lesser extent, archaeologists) who explicitly think materially about the social, without invoke Marxism in its various guises and who thinking about Marxism. The Cold War led seek in Marxist theories a method and a theory many scholars in the West to use ‘materialism’ for thinking materially about the social. The as a code word for Marxism for much of the chapter pays particular attention to the instances twentieth century. More recently, in certain when such authors attempt to think critically quarters of social scientific thought, materiality about what difference it makes to stress mate- stands in for the empirical or the real, as against riality and to think ‘materially’.